About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
resolution is the best resolution in syria. >> any indication that assad got the president's message yesterday and took it to heart? [inaudible] >> obviously, have not had a direct conversation -- >> right -- >> it would be hard to imagine they are not fully aware of the seriousness of the president's position on this, the seriousness with which we would take the prospect of the use of chemical weapons and, you know, i think that message was delivered clearly by the president, by others in the administration, and others around the world. we continue to say that if the assad regime makes the mistake of using chemical weapons or fails to meet obligations to secure chemical weapons, there will be consequences, and the regime will be held accountable. >> [inaudible] you said a loophole there. they have to use the weapons first before we do anything? preparations to say it's not enough? >> i'll repeat what i said, connie. if the assad regime makes the mistake of using chemical weapons or fails to meet the obligations to secure them, there's consequences, and the regime is accountable. the
may be happening in terms of the russian policy toward syria? since we have mentioned iran can we get as far away as syria? >> you can get as far away as syria i hope with some connection. i do appreciate that but the question of syria is of totally sufficient importance so we could address that and thank you for the question. my own gut feeling and i don't know how you guys feel, but the russians have been for the last several weeks, there have been indications of unhappiness with what is going on in syria without a clear sense of what it is that they can can shape it and whether they can do it on their own or with the u.s.. the u.s. has always wanted the russians to be part of that kind of a solution. if there could be one at all. so, if the russians in any way are moving toward the american decision with respect to syria, i think we are all better off for it. okay, another question out there? there is one right up here. and then we will assume that is the last question. >> i wonder if, you all alluded to it and i wonder if we could call the diplomacy -- moving towards the inf negot
are seeing them play a more active and positive role in international diplomacy. in syria we have work to do. you see where we are headed with respect to styria based on secretary clinton's recent comments but china is strategic, china has strong interest in managing its ascension as a global power, not the only rising power in the neighborhood. it is something that we share. we believe both we, the united states, and the community of democracies have the ability to strategically put that together and do it based on the first two principles and partnerships. >> we just don't have a large advertising campaign. i just want to comment on china's syria plan. it has nothing to do with syria which is quite a separate issue. it has everything to do with wounding a america. this -- china and russia have got together and overtures were sent to delhi to send some sort of needlework if you want to use that word and india thankfully has resisted and keeps its options more nuanced and flexible. china's natural game, dr. kissinger has three chapters in his book. the interesting thing about that game is it
, and some of them in the foreign policy area are very relevant today. for instance, over syria. we understand that. we hope that at recent events, syria may be moving russia and the united states closer in terms of our thinking. but it is only a good thing to bring russia into a rules-based system with mechanisms for peaceful, transparent dispute resolution. there is no debate. and i think the chair knows this full well, that the very tragic and senseless death of anticorruption lawyer sergei magnitsky who died while in russian custody, that those events are simply unacceptable. they're appalling. and it highlights a human rights problem that has grown in its scope, not diminished. it's one we hope to be able to resolve with good relationships and good discussions. senator cardin, a sponsor of that legislation, in the house of the senate is going to speak shortly about it, and i will leave him to describe in full the nature of that particular component of this bill. suffice it to say, that human rights -- democracy and transparency activists in russia favor the passage of construct
in the middle east if you look at syria where the u.s. is at risk for being drawn into a serious conflict there, and weapons, there's obviously talk about iran as well. is the shift occurring before the job is done? >> well, i would go back to the presidency strategy on this, and take a look at it. didn't say that we would only, we reject everything we have in the military, across our government into the asia pacific. and prioritize the asia-pacific but also talked about the enduring requirement for us to be present and any security role in the middle east as well. so, you know, we're talking about i think a near-term perspective on this. you know, we see a kaleidoscope in afghanistan. yes, the middle east has issues and has historically had issues that will require i think u.s., obviously he was leadership and also will require certain level of military security overtime. and we will have to balance that as we look at the size and nature of our force structure. and what we have, the assets we have to be able to accomplish it, but i'm convinced that we can do both in the long run. and i'm convi
questions. all parties should recognize the need for unity in the coming year when events in iran, syria, afghanistan, north korea, and other locations may test american national security in extreme ways. i commend each of you, my senate colleagues, for the commitment that led you to stand for election in the united states senate to begin with. running for office is a difficult endeavor that is usually accompanied by great personal risk and cost. each one of you is capable of being a positive force for changing the tone of debate in our country. each one of you has a responsibility not only to act with integrity and represent your constituents but also to make informed and imaginative choice on which good governance for our country depends. i am optimistic about our country's future. i believe that both internal divisions and external threats can be overcome. the united states will continue to serve as the inspiration for people seeking peace, freedom, and economic prosperity. and the united states senate should and will be at the forefront of this advancement. may we seek each day from
ability to meet, just as we found it ethnic cleansing in the balkans, we can stop the slaughter in syria. just as they nurture the democratic transitions after communism fell in eastern europe, we support the sources of freedom in the middle east today. just as we were able to prevail in the long struggle against the soviet union during the cold war, we can prevail in the global conflict with islamist extremism and terrorism that we were forced in to predict terrorist attacks of september 11, 2001. but all that to will require leadership in the united states senate. it will require leaders who will stand against the siren song of isolationism, who will defend our defense and foreign assistance budget, who will support when necessary the use of america's military power against our enemies in the world and who will have the patience and determination when the public grows weary to see our battles through until they are one. mr. president, i first stepped foot in this chamber, sit years ago in the summer of 1963 comments by a thick so many in my generation that president john f. kennedy and
've set aside to deal with the refugee problem from the war in syria. as to israel, the third title that's affected is the counternarcotics military assistance program, foreign military financing. we've contacted the department of state and the department of defense, and they told us if you cut this account by 67%, it's going to put pressure on defense accounts, and they are already under the threat of sequestration. it will affect the ability of our nation to help israel with the f-35 aircraft, armored vehicles, and protective systems for their vehicles. if you think as i do the world is a very dangerous place and it is better for america to lead than to come home and play like the world is not a dangerous place, vote against this amendment. it's $9 billion, it's 67% of the three accounts i have just described, and ask yourself as a member of the united states senate is now the time to tell the king of jordan and the people of jordan we cannot help you with refugees overflowing into your country because if the king goes, what happens next? is now the time to send to the people of israel
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8